Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1951SC229
S.R. Das J.1. This is an appln. under Article 32, Const. Ind. complaining of the infringement of the petnr's. fundamental right to employment in the State service of resp. 1.2. By a notfn. dated 16-12-1949, published in the Fort St. George Gazette, dated 20-12-1949, the Madras Public Services Commission invited applns. for 83 posts of District Munsifs in the Madras Subordinate Civil Judicial Service. It was notified that out of the 83 posts to be filled by direct recruitment, 12 were to go to persons already in the service holding certain classes of employment in the Madras Civil Judicial Dept. & that the remaining 71 posts would be filled up from among the Official Receivers, Assistant Public Prosecutors & practising members of the Bar. It was further notified that the selection of the candidates would, be made from various castes, religions & communities in pursuance of the rules proscribed in what are popularly described as Communal G. Os., namely, for Harijans 19, Muslims 5, Christ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1951SC226; (1951)IMLJ621(SC); [1951]2SCR525
Das, J. 1. This judgment covers both Case No. 270 of 1951 (State of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan) and Case No. 271 of 1951 (State of Madras v. C. R. Srinivasan) which are appeals from the judgment passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras on July 27, 1950, on two separate applications under article 226 of the Constitution complaining of breach of the petitioners' fundamental right to get admission into educational institutions maintained by the State. 2. The State of Madras maintains four Medical Colleges and only 330 seats are available for students in those four Colleges. Out of these 330 seats, 17 seats are reserved for students coming from outside the State and 12 seats are reserved for discretionary allotment by the State and the balance of the seats available are apportioned between four distinct groups of districts in the State. 3. Likewise, the State of Madras maintains four Engineering Colleges and the total number of seats available for students in those Col...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1951SC230; (1951)ILLJ621SC; [1951]2SCR380
Kania, C.J.1. In these appeals the question whether the Industrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes) had jurisdiction to make the awards has been directed by the Court to be tried as a preliminary issue. The decision depends on the true construction of sections 7, 8 15 and 16 of the Industrial Disputes Act. On this question, the agreed statement of facts shows that by a notification of the Government of India dated the 13th June 1949, the Central Government constituted an Industrial Tribunal for the adjudication of industrial disputes in banking companies consisting of Mr. K. C. Sen, chairman, Mr. S. P. Varma and Mr. J. N. Mazumdar. A second notification dated the 24th August, 1949, was thereafter issued as follows :- 'In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 1 of section 8 of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Central Government was pleased to appoint Mr. N. Chandrasekhara Aiyar as a member of the Industrial Tribunal constituted by the notifications of the Government of India in the Mi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1951SC253; [1951]2SCR474
Kania, C.J. 1. This is a suit filed on the 15th of January, 1950, under the Original Jurisdiction of the Federal Court as it was functioning before the Constitution of India came into force on the 26th January, 1950. The State of Seraikella was a State in Orissa and its Ruler was Raja Aditya Pratap Singh Deo. On the 16th August, 1947, the plaintiff State acceded to the Dominion of India by virtue of an Instrument of Accession executed by its Ruler and accepted by the Governor-General of India under section 6 of the Government of India Act, 1935. After reciting that under the Indian Independence Act, 1947, the Dominion of India was set up and that under the Government of India Act, 1935, as adapted, it provided that an Indian State may accede to the Dominion of India by an Instrument of Accession, the Instrument stated that the Raja acceded to the Dominion of India and that he accepted that the matters specified in the Schedule to the Instrument were the matters with respect to which th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1951SC270; [1951]2SCR451
Patanjali Sastri, J. 1. These three petitions have been presented to this Court under article 32 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of writs in the nature of habeas corpus for release of the petitioners who are respectively the President, Vice-President and Secretary of the Hindu Mahasabha of the Delhi State. 2. The petitioners were arrested on 22nd August, 1950, by order of the District Magistrate, Delhi, made under sub-section (2) read with clause (a) sub-clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The order ran as follows : 'Whereas I, Rameshwar Dayal, District Magistrate, Delhi, am satisfied that with a view to the maintenance of public order in Delhi it is necessary to do so, I Rameshwar Dayal, District Magistrate, Delhi, hereby order the detention of......... under sub-section (2) of section 3(1)(a)(ii) of the Preventive Detention Act. Given under my seal and signature'. 3. The grounds of d...
Tag this Judgment!